Katt posted:

In the comic the women are blessed by the goddess to only give birth to girls.

I bet in the original draft they just dashed all the male babies against the rocks. Because if you're going to ask the goddess for a favour of divine intervention then you don't waste it on something a determined warrior nation can handle themselves (see 300).

hyperhazard posted:

He's unfortunately completely sincere.

https://nextshark.com/hank-yoo-meet-the-wannabe-asian-cowboy-who-wants-to-murder-blm-activists-and-muslims/

Closed-Down Pizza Parlor posted:

oh good, it's yet another subject that DP doesn't know dick from gently caress about

Madkal posted:

As I white racist I have no historical context on why an African country (imagined or otherwise) would have a distrust of people from other countries.

edit: also loling about the anti-Democracy thing that would make [x-country] great again

Deceitful Penguin posted:

Lol there's not a lot to learn, but drat if it doesn't stop the endless verbiage from people trying their damndest to convince themselves

My fav thing is how they now want access to Queer organizations because they really, genuinely, think they're equivalent to gay people

zoux posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/benshapiro/status/962068735832899586?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

zoux posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/benshapiro/status/962068735832899586?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

T-man posted:

Hi, I've worked in/run multiple queer activist orgs, as well as having a literal goddamn degree in queer studies. You are incorrect.

The systemic stigmatization of sexuality is a common thread between queer, trans, kinky, and non-monogamous individuals. The same process which demands a strict adherence to heterosexuality also relies upon the deliberate control of what kinds of hetero sex one is allowed to perform, often for a continual curtailing of radical activity, to say nothing of the BDSM of queer individuals. Like, looking at this old-rear end picture about the work of Gayle Rubin, who was taught in my intro to women's studies course, you can see how the outer edges of acceptable sexuality included BDSM was back in 1984. That's really drat oldschool in my field, so your ignorance of this work points out clearly that you have no idea what you are talking about. Hope this helps.



e: un-hotlinked, forgot about that.

Trauma Dog 3000 posted:

"cross-generational" lol

FFT posted:

i'm hoping that's just like the pilots i've run into that are into their late 40s at least and doing their damnedest to date women in their early 20s.

_{which is still gross, but could be worse}

FFT posted:

i'm hoping that's just like the pilots i've run into that are into their late 40s at least and doing their damnedest to date women in their early 20s.

_{which is still gross, but could be worse}

Volcott posted:

Don't DILFshame.

Trauma Dog 3000 posted:

even if, what is the third ring of that segment

Intoluene posted:

I would say things stigmatised for good reasons and acts typically illegal. Pedophilia, rape, extreme sexual sadism, etc.

Trauma Dog 3000 posted:

even if, what is the third ring of that segment

T-man posted:

The source is in the picture, let yourself enjoy the magic of the reading rainbow today!

there wolf posted:

Admiral Joeslop posted:

Can Ian be the thread mascot?

Mak0rz posted:

https://twitter.com/Frances11791313/status/962097631810891776

Zedd posted:

Don't tell Zuarg about this.

T-man posted:

Hi, I've worked in/run multiple queer activist orgs, as well as having a literal goddamn degree in queer studies. You are incorrect.

The systemic stigmatization of sexuality is a common thread between queer, trans, kinky, and non-monogamous individuals. The same process which demands a strict adherence to heterosexuality also relies upon the deliberate control of what kinds of hetero sex one is allowed to perform, often for a continual curtailing of radical activity, to say nothing of the BDSM of queer individuals. Like, looking at this old-rear end picture about the work of Gayle Rubin, who was taught in my intro to women's studies course, you can see how the outer edges of acceptable sexuality included BDSM was back in 1984. That's really drat oldschool in my field, so your ignorance of this work points out clearly that you have no idea what you are talking about. Hope this helps.

e: un-hotlinked, forgot about that.

Puppy Time posted:

I think it is possible to acknowledge that it is bad for popular books to represent BDSM as a boundaries-free and consent-optional practice AND that it is bad when some elements within the BDSM community are trying to force their way under the "queer umbrella" against the will of people more traditionally under said umbrella.

(And also that there is some room for argument either way regarding BDSM/"queer" crossover, but said argument should probably be had by individual communities and not random dumbasses in a thread devoted to idiots on social media.)

Deceitful Penguin posted:

Yeah, when we had that argument here, we had on one hand most of the oldest, most serious gay rights campaigners and almost all the lesbians who were against and on the other, a lot of bald men with bad beards and Q/T peeps, to everyones surprise, seemed to enjoy hurting women sexually but ~in a woke way bro~

Puppy Time posted:

I think it is possible to acknowledge that it is bad for popular books to represent BDSM as a boundaries-free and consent-optional practice AND that it is bad when some elements within the BDSM community are trying to force their way under the "queer umbrella" against the will of people more traditionally under said umbrella.

Puppy Time posted:

OK cool, congratulations, maybe other people in their own communities have different experiences. Also nobody in this loving thread cares.

Asiina posted:

I never read the book, and I know from excerpts it reads like bad fanfiction (because it is), but honestly I watched the movie with a friend as a laugh but it wasn't nearly as bad as everything I'd heard.

They lay out explicit rules and he respects them. The times he goes too far, she tells him off immediately and he backs off. She's not the blank slate pushover that Bella from Twilight is.

The big dramatic climax of the first movie which is supposed to show how broken and abusive he actually is and how she can be strong by breaking free is her outright asking him to push boundaries by whipping her which she always refused before. He asks her multiple times if she's sure, tells her exactly what's going to happen (he's going to hit her 5 times), checks in with her part way through, and makes sure she knows her safeword. Then after it's over and he's trying to do aftercare she flips out at him and calls him a monster and literally runs away. She initiated the more extreme scene and did not use the tools she had available to her.

I honestly wonder how many people who bash the movie have actually seen it, because it was not at all what I expected.

TinTower posted:

Less idiocy leaking out of the thread, more idiots from outside the thread, thanks.

Midnight Voyager posted:

Why the gently caress is this a 13 second video?

Freaquency posted:

Just start unfollowing any page that makes a post like that.

Dave Grool posted:

I deleted my facebook while super drunk, no regrets

fake e: actually some minor regrets like keeping up with some family across the country but overall worth it

Katt posted:

I thought drinking was supposed to impair judgement and not improve it.

TinTower posted:

Less idiocy leaking out of the thread, more idiots from outside the thread, thanks.

Grey Fox posted:

I'm old enough to remember when comparing W to Batman was the dumbest comic book movie poo poo you'd read online